The National Sea Of Red Ink

Remember the national debt? Many believed, or hoped, that last year's budget accord between the White House and Congress was a step toward reduction of the deficit. That's proving to be a pipe dream.

To help balance the books, the 1990 agreement contained a freeze on domestic and military spending. President Bush supported a tax increase and Congress raised the debt ceiling -- the limit on how much the government can borrow.

Congress authorized an astounding $1 trillion increase in the debt limit -- from $3.123 trillion to $4.145 trillion. That hike was thought to be more than enough to tide the Treasury over until after the next election. But the government has incurred the higher-than-anticipated expenses of the savings-and-loan bailout, increased Medicare costs and growth in numbers of people on unemployment benefits. Not to worry. Congress can increase the debt limit, as it does routinely.

The cost is so high as to be incalculable for most of us: Interest paid on the debt is projected to be $286.3 billion for this fiscal year. In comparison, the bill for human services delivered by the federal government, including Medicare and Medicaid, will come to $222.4 billion. Social Security will cost $263.8 billion. Military spending is the only part of the budget that will exceed interest payments -- $295.7 billion for fiscal 1991 vs. $286.3 billion for interest.

If we assume that a reduction of military spending would revitalize government and the economy, how much more would a reduction in debt interest payments and a reduction of the military do for the country? In other words, it is time to reopen discussion of the budget and debt.

The 1990 agreement must be redrawn in light of world events. A year ago, it was decided that money from the military side could not be transferred to domestic needs. That should no longer hold. The military budget can be safely cut, probably by one-third.

Not all that is saved from the military side need go to domestic spending. One of the best things government could do for the poor and for the middle class would be to reduce the debt. That would free capital for new business and jobs.

Even where domestic needs require a new program -- health care,

for example -- the guiding principle should be pay as you go.

Good government is not always minimal government. Needs will arise and new spending will be necessary. But government must first be solvent and fiscally responsible. That is a basic duty.